Reference:
This article.
No,
not the article itself, but the comments.
The author of the article has a winner mentality, actually. He, or his playgroup, found a cool and
innovative combo that most people probably hadn’t discovered. And being justifiably excited about this
discovery, he posted it to share with the world.
And
he got pilloried for it. By a bunch of
people who take being ‘scrubs’ to a new level.
Could
you imagine this happening in another game with a different community? Imagine a Magic player discovering a new
combo that no one ever thought of, crafting a pretty cool deck out of it, and
sharing it with the community. He would
be complimented, encouraged and would set off a chain reaction hundreds of
other players rushing out to test it out themselves in order to tune and
improve the new interaction further. If
the deck turned out to be really good, he would probably have it named after
him, and would have a measure of immortality in the community.
Not
in this community. Nope! All innovation is strictly punished by a
bunch of fucking losers who hate the idea of progress, innovation or
competition. These are the types of
players who want to play infinite games of their Space Marine battle company
list against their buddy’s 180 Boyz Ork army until the end of time. They interpret any sort of discovery of a
clever rules interaction as ungentlemanly at best, and cheating at worst. Fuck them.
They are holding this game
back, and holding the rest of the community back.
And
let’s be frank: this Daemon/Ork list probably isn’t even very good. But it isn’t about whether it’s good or
not. It’s fucking creative and
innovative. It pushes the boundaries of
what players consider possible further out.
That is good! Even if the idea
itself isn’t good, we should encourage this kind of experimentation and
innovation and creativity. That is what
a winner mentality is. If you’re not on
board for it, you’re a fucking loser, so shut your mouth.
Thoughts? Comments?
Questions?
I think it's ok to point out the eventual problems with the list, but I agree that most of the posters went way overboard with their disdain, especially those whining about people trying to break the game.
ReplyDeleteI personally like this kind of thinking (probably due to my Magic: The Gathering background) and think it's healthy for the more clever members of the community to flush out these ideas.
Shame so many posters are so stuck on what they consider to be 'ungentlemanly'. Must be a bummer to take only what other people want to see and not what you would like to try.
I agree with this.
ReplyDeleteI used to play Magic quite avidly and I loved finding new combinations or trying new combinations that others had developed.
I still enjoy doing that in 40k, but the price of doing that is much higher. It's not just a matter of picking up some new cards off ebay and building a deck. There's the initial model cost, plus the painting time if you want to play a painted army.
That extra investment can really put a damper on innovation unless you have a group that supports proxies. It puts people in the mindset of doing what they can with what they have, rather than trying to find new combos that would require further investment into an already expensive game.
Fantastic article. He came up with a clever rules interaction that produced an interesting, if not super competitive result. What I find particularly interesting is how all those self-appointed lords of 40k decry him a d-bag for merely thinking about a list concept and vows to pick up their armies if facing them. That's cool, he'd get the Win and they'd look like assclowns when they tell the TO "Yeah, I resigned that game because I don't like his list concept."
ReplyDeleteAnd thus a perfect reason to ensure that tournaments do not use player scored Sports that includes the opportunity to destroy your opponent because you didn't like their list.
DeleteI saw that too, and had the same reaction. The combo is hilarious. I have no idea if its any good or not, but it's certainly not game breaking by any means. (Something like the WorldGorger Dragon combo in magic may be game breaking, but even that is pushing it)
ReplyDeleteThen the reactions... my god, these people are horrible. Whoever came up with the combo gets absolutely raked across the coals for breaking the spirit of the game and other such scrub insults. I'm aghast (though not shocked) at the reaction.
That's the thing about bols, all the commenters complain about how WAAC the articles are, but the articles aren't good at all. You've got terrible Draigowing lists and that idiot's Tyranid series (first defending the reserve army list, then the "swarm" list), and they all get denounced as WAAC. If those count as competitive lists, what kind of fluff bunny world do you live in?
(I don't want to know the answer to that rhetorical question, as I've seen enough glimpses into that world on Bolter and Chainsword to scare me away)
Re-reading the bols comments *shudder*, I'm struck by how many people would refuse to play against this list. Some threaten violence (lol), others simply walk away. How much of a dick can you be? Honestly. If a buddy of mine came up with this, I'd laugh at how awesome it is, then we'd play to see if it's any good. I wouldn't take it so damned personally.
DeleteThis list / bols post got posted in our local forum and we had a short discussion if it actually works.
ReplyDeleteWe ended reaching a consensus that it wouldn't because Aura of Decay's attacks are targeted... not a blanket AOE.
During no time during our discussion it started to get...
retarded?
Oh well... that is the internet for you! xD
Addendum: the GW "hobby" has a spectrum of people who use the products for different reasons... there is the
ReplyDelete1. Competitive Gladiator
2. Fluffy Bunny
3. Hobbyist
4. A bit of all 3 above.
Guess which are the group of guys who kick up the most fuss about "WAACOMFGBBQKFCPIZZAHUT" stuff like this?
xD
I think defining the /b/ols commenters as the 40k community might be a misnomer. While many of them continually decry what is said or talked about there, none of them ever leave or do anything about it.
ReplyDeleteThat list was very interesting. I immediately began thinking of ways that Dark Eldar might be able to do something similar to aquire pain tokens. It's a line of thought I'd have otherwise never had. That being said, I do wonder how GW will address the killing of one's own forces for bonuses like this. Only about 30 more days until the first FAQ for the rule book. :)
My regular 40k opponent's IG and my Orks have longstanding rivalry that goes back to third edition. Over the years we constantly tweaked our armies to find innovative ways of putting the beat down on each other - and we always had a good time doing it. These ass-clown commenters are the type that never have fun playing the game and just need to piss off so the rest of us can have a good time with our hobby.
ReplyDeleteAs a general concept, the idea of purchasing sacrificial slaves to kill in order to "power up" your own abilities is both fluffy and comes with its own inherent checks and balances. I love how every one of those posters believes that they have insight into the "one true spirit" with which the game is meant to be played. Frankly it reminds me of the religious nutjobs who feel that they have a firm enough grasp on god's will to ostracize those who don't follow it. Zealots!
ReplyDeleteActually so long as these guys are playing Imperial armies the self-righeous outrage is entirely in character.
DeleteI'm not surprised at all. Gamesworkshop is a mini company. It's a hobby. They make fun games to sell minis. 40k was not designed to be a competitive game like magic. (for more info see http://investor.games-workshop.com/our-business-model/)
ReplyDeleteSome players just can't cope with the idea of competitive 40k, and believe it's ruining their hobby. So I'm not entirely surprised by some of the reactions.
Me personally it's freaking GREAT that people compete, because we do get to see builds and strategies like those in the article cited. I am not a competitive player, I lean to the fluffy side. But competitive players is what really drives the "out of the box" thinking. I'm all for that Competitive players have given me ideas when I've gotta bored of a particular army.. Got bored with SW (and a round of price hikes) last year... Read a couple cool articles from JBalls, and get inspired to help my son build out his BA! Gave me another take on some units, that got me interested again.
I can understand the argument of an entirely for-fun gamer, because rarely can you find more than one other person in your area that has the same mentality. Even players that play more for fun, but aren't truely fun-at-all-costs players pick up on competitive little notes, and the spread of net lists. This makes it hard for the first group to find games with people that aren't at least playing a list with some shadow of competitiveness to it, and it annoys them. It makes the non-competitve environment more competitive, and shifts it away from their wheel-house. I'm not saying I sympathize with them, just that I can understand why they feel the way they do.
DeleteThis build has been around for a long time and is known not to work as claimed-- you can't use Aura of Decay without a valid enemy target in range, and while the Gretchin are enemy units they aren't valid targets, so you can't cast the Aura of Decay without having an actual enemy unit within 6" as well.
ReplyDeleteTo make matters worse, it's not even good in its original form, as it relies on several rolls going your way before the game even begins. If you don't go first and the opponent can kill your Gretchin, you're screwed. If you don't get your preferred wave, you're screwed. If Epidemius scatters out of range of the Gretchin, you're screwed. If the opponent kills Epidemius's unit before the powerup goes into effect, you're screwed. If your opponent is Eldar or Dark Eldar, you're screwed.
There are just way too many things that can go wrong for this build to work competitively.
Whether it's good, or even works at all, is not really the point.
DeleteWell, to give some validity to the other side....a little searching on the net found some prices for MTG decks, which said for winning at the LGS were looking at $30-50 and winning at local tournaments were about $100-200. You know, about equivalent to those 40k lists that can give a hard game even if they need a lucky break to win.
ReplyDeleteWhen 40k gets changed up so GW can sell more models (i.e.-balance changes to enhance the sale of unpopular models collecting dust in warhouses) it is just a bit more pricy to "upgrade your deck" in 40k.
What is this in regards to?
Delete$200 is cheap for a magic deck. Of course the problem with Standard is that they rotate out each year and you have to spend another $200 on the next deck.
DeleteAt least with 40k I am still using my Rhinos that came out about the same time as Magic. Sure you can come up with some silly builds with Allies and the double FOC at 2k. I have just grabbed some Grey Hunters off Ebay (secondhand warhammer is a lot cheaper than magic cards).
The point Nikephoros is that 40K is expensive. A lot more expensive than MTG. The main reason? Paying for over detailed models that, especially on infantry, have details that cannot be distinguished on the table, but only when the mini is picked up and closely examined.
Delete@Lyracian Yep, real cheap, but I wasn't going to get into the huge price jump from local area play to big tournaments. Those decks are insane. Now, I was skimming, but a couple of people pointed out that the lands and certain other mana cards could be passed from deck to deck so they were a one time expense.
I agree, when the next Necron codex comes out, I have an entire Destroyer Wing that I picked up when someone sold out their Necron army cheap right before the codex came out. By then, the D & HD will be useful once again. It even had a bunch of Flayed Ones (this guy evidently played both the Destroyer Wing & Fear builds) and Pariahs. All in all in excess of $1K retail for quite a bit less. Oh, I'm just using the Warriors, Scarabs, Spyders and a couple of Lords. Every now and then, for fun, I'll use the Wraiths & C'tan.
The question I have is why does the cost matter? Just because 40k armies cost a ton of money that entitles these cry-babies to poison the well of the community? Screw that. In fact, since armies DO cost so much they are even more wrong.
DeleteI think part of the reason might be just how long a typical game goes. Even with competent, practiced tourney goers who were intimately familiar with 5th a 2k point game generally took around an hour and a half (unless it was a complete wipeout). For a lot of guys that's all the time they have for the evening, and especially when you know you've lost after the first turn it can be a bit depressing.
ReplyDeleteMagic and Warmahordes, on the other hand, are much, much quicker to finish a game on average. Even a best of three match for Magic only takes around half an hour, and a round of Warmahordes is around the same amount (I think, haven't played that game in particular). When you have the opportunity to play multiple games in a night it takes the sting out of getting your face pounded in one game.
Still not exactly an excuse for the commenting behavior, but potentially one reason behind it.
The GW "hobby" rewards the "collector" more than the "power gamer".
ReplyDeleteIf you are a person who started with Space Marines and then branched out to a Xenos army later there is a high chance you spent time expanding one of the armies or even both (for the purpose of rotating armies around) to the extend that you don't care if they nerfed stuff in a new codex because you pretty much own "everything".
Most people wouldn't "collect" more than 2 armies and if they do, generally, they have many "small armies" or "flavor of the quarter armies".
People who "army jump" burn out quickly because very few actually have the financial power to buy (and sell at a loss) a new army whenever a new codex is released. Let alone paint (or pay somebody to paint) the new army.
If you have been playing 40k for at least 2 editions (6th isn't over, so it doesn't count) and you are still around, high chance is you have some sort of Space Marine army of a good size and some "side experimental army" that you started for fun.
I started a space marine army twice. I started with Black Templars, sold it (because it was really boring back in 4th)and spent about 2 years experimenting with xenos armies (nids and necrons). after the release of the current nid codex, i dumped both armies and went back to starting a custom chapter space marine army and have been enjoying the hobby a lot more ever since (custom chapters are the best! because you can expand the army until you can use ALL the SMEQ codices!)
I do have an IG army at the side... but that is only because I love the tanks and those fantastic Kasrkins!... don't really enjoy playing that army... xD
What i am saying is if you enter or approach the "gw hobby" with the right mindset, you get more mileage out of the models. if you don't enjoy painting models and have gamer ADD, you'll never really enjoy the hobby/game.
This sort of thing is the exact reason why I've given up on 40k and gone back to fighting games.
ReplyDelete